A good, basic framework for understanding a nativity in the Star Constellation Zodiac (as distinct from the "signs") is as follows: A> Aspects to the lights (Sun and Moon); B> Angular planets/lights and their aspects. C> Constellations of lights and Asc. Within that frame- work, I began looking for indicators of intellect [a 'how-fancy-is- your-Mercury?' question] and noticed the multiple ways Mercury is emphasised in those who specialise in mental activity. That search broadened to other talents. Currently the concept of different learning styles is filtering through to public awareness. Just one book, educator T. Armstrong's In Their Own Way defines at least seven learning styles, a valuable way of understanding other talents than mentation, and a rich research field for comparison to astrological talents.
When a person has an outstanding quality (talent, or characteristic) it is astrologically indicated more than once by planetary and/or constellation archetypes. Again, this is within the basic star constellation framework, and with 15 degree (ecliptic plane) aspects to the lights, and with planets/lights "On" (not to) the mundane angles. The angles (Asc=East, MC=South, Dsc=West, and IC=North) are 'derived' from the Earth's daily 24 hour rotation in relation to the Sun, as Sunrise, Noon, Sunset, and Midnight.
Let me also note that each archetype has in its virtue the seed of its vice, both the expressions of its principle; and likewise in the vice the seed of its virtue. For instance, Michelangelo, (Sun in starfield Pisces for creative imagination) saw in a block of stone the form of David and hewed it out. And yet, Pis/Nep folk are often accused of seeing things that aren't there. An actor by virtue of Neptune conveys a truth through illusion, and yet Neptune is accused of unreal feelings. The paradox is the key here. If a talent is strong, it will be more of an asset and more of a liability, both simultaneously.
Within each planetary expression, there is that vice-virtue continuum. For instance, for Mercury, a youthful playfulness can also used as gamesmanship; quick intellect can be virtuoso trickery. Venus' loving sociability can be spineless compromising. The Moon's empathy and emotional support - emotional dependence. Mars' bravery - brutality. Jupiter's positive outlook - selective snobbery. Saturn's conservatism - blockage. Uranus' individuality and creativity - eccentricity and nuttiness. Neptune's sensitivity - spacecase foolishness. Pluto's laser focus - fundamentalist radicalism. "Virtue itself turns vice, being misapplied; And vice sometimes by action dignified" - (Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet.)
These following little lists for tallying composites are additional to the traditional concept of the similarity between the planets' dignities (i.e., rulerships) and the constellations. The rulership- constellation connection is consistent only in the original star constellation zodiac and is the basis for the lists. In other words, the correspondences between planet and "sign" do not work in the tropical signs because of the signs' displacement or precession from the original constellations. Hence the Sidereal Zodiac provides a consistent symbolism that allows for immediate and obvious interpretation.
What follows is a tally list for drawing it all together. Do not think however that three or four points of emphasis for one talent is more important than two points. It depends on what is tallied. I submit these for noting special emphasis of a talent, not as a "rating" because of the number of points. This list is valuable in focusing on a chart's strongest qualities, and for comparison of similarities between charts. Mainly, these little lists and notes give keys for synthesis, and are significant not only for what is included, but also for what is excluded.
| Sun | Moon | Planets |
| Sun Asc (especially in Leo) | Moon Asc (especially in Cancer) | Pluto Asc (especially in Aries) |
| Sun Angular | Moon Angular | Pluto Angular |
| Moon-Sun aspect | Pluto with Light/s | |
| Sun Leo | Moon Cancer | Aries Sun |
| Leo Asc | Cancer Asc | Aries Asc |
| Sun conjunct TP/CQD** | Moon conjunct TP/CQD** | *** |
*the constellation of its dignity
**Turning Points / Cross-Quarter Days (see Seasons)
***Moon Constellation omitted deliberately!
| Sun constellation | Example: Scorpio | |
| Sun's strongest aspect is to its constellation ruler | Scorpio Sun to Mars | |
| Sun's constellation ruler angular | Mars angular | |
| Moon's strongest aspect to Sun's constellation ruler | Moon to Mars | |
| Ascendant in same constellation (very potent if Sun Asc) | Scorpio Sun and Asc | |
| Moon in same constellation | Scorpio Sun and Moon | |
| Moon constellation | Example: Pisces | |
| Moon's strongest aspect is to its constellation ruler | Pisces Moon to Neptune | |
| Moon's constellation ruler angular | Neptune Angular | |
| Sun's strongest aspect to Moon's constellation ruler | Sun to Neptune | |
| Ascendant in same constellation | Pisces Moon and Ascendant | |
| Sun in same constellation | Pisces Moon and Sun | |
| Ascendant constellation | Example: Aquarius | |
| Ruler angular (especially ascending) | Uranus angular | |
| Sun in same constellation | Aquarius Sun and Ascendant | |
| Moon in same constellation | Aquarius Moon and Ascendant | |
| Ascendant ruler aspects Sun | Sun to Uranus | |
| Ascendant ruler aspects Moon | Moon to Uranus |
Angular Planet/s
Aspecting planets modify angular planets, and aspecting lights
modify and intensify angular planet/s.
Angular Light/s
Likewise, if the light is angular, its strongest
aspected planet is also significant. If light is ascending as
constellation ruler, then it is very significant.
Special note on Lights
When the lights aspect each other strongly,
they are more intensified and will aspect the same planets (note
that the Moon is the energy most featured in Sun-Moon aspects).
Also lights are more potent "on" the Angles (Asc-Dsc, MC-IC,
generated by the 24 hour day)
Honourable Mention #1: "Rapt Parallels," or bodies in Parallel Altitude have the effect of a strong conjunction; especially if one or both Lights are involved. Also Elevation, the distance up from the Horizon (Asc-DES), has been considered important and bears watching.
Honourable Mention #2: The idea of the Ruler of the Ascendant as key to a nativity has ancient roots. I have found "aspects" to the Ruler of Ascendant sometimes helpful as a point of emphasis.
Honourable Mention #3: The "Crossings" of lights and/or planets in the latitude (Declination) of birth, as indicated in ASTRO CARTO GRAPHY maps, I find are a part of natal potential, a kind of secondary angularity, according to location on Earth.
The angles of day are distinct from ecliptic longitude aspects of Sun and Moon (see Ecliptic System). This is an absolutely crucial point in distinguishing angles and aspects. Astrologically, one must have reference to at least three astronomical systems: Ecliptic (longitude and latitude); Equatorial (Declination and RAMC); and Horizon (Altitude and Azimuth). I do not find that "aspects to" the angles are significant. A planet must be bodily present (conjunct) on the horizon and/or culminating south or north to be potent. For instance, if the Sun is sextile the horizon (Asc or Dsc) from under the horizon in the north, there will still be no light. (Note: conjunct or rather 'parallel' Declinations in the Equatorial System, especially to Sun and Moon, are significant in the latitude in which they occur.)
Note: Different rules apply to each of the Earth's Angles/Directions-- MC-IC vs. Asc-Dsc: consider stars culminating (MC-IC) south and north with the lights and planets in reference to "only" longitude [see Horizon and Equatorial Systems]. Such vertical "alignment" of any stars, planets, or lights in RAMC on the Meridian circle has honourable mention from ancient times. In reference to the Horizon, rising/ascending and/or setting/descending stars parallel with the lights or planets would seem to be very significant. (See Horizon System)
The strongest aspects are the conjunction, opposition and square. These strongest aspects diminish in intensity in 15 degree arcs down to 45 degrees (halfway between conjunction and waxing square; and halfway between waning square and conjunction), and down to 135 degrees (halfway between waxing square and opposition; and halfway opposition and waning square).
The other half of the problem is to understand effective orb in relation to 15 degree aspects. With a maximum orb of about 3 degrees, a system called the Quindecimus (meaning "15") Orb-Aspect System for measuring optimum intensity of combined Orb and Aspect is a very good rule-of-thumb method. The Quindecimus orb aspect system takes into consideration that effective orb is actually closer to 2-1/2 degrees but allows 3 degrees orb as a drag-net. (This system is for measuring aspects in ecliptic longitude, not angles. Often more degrees are allowed for orb on the angles to allow for inaccurate recording of birth times as the angles change degrees approximately every 4 minutes.)
To get the Cross-Quarter Days, one can add 45 degrees to Equinoxes and Solstices: currently, that gives 20 deg 19' of Aries-Libra and Cancer-Capricorn. [Perhaps because of precession, the Cross-Quarter Days are recorded as celebrated 40 days after the solstices and equinoxes and would thus be 15 deg 19' in above constellations. See Barry Fell's America BC for most interesting findings on ancient celebrations.] Please note that these are special points of emphasis during the "year" (an Earth-Sun revolution), and constitute the unique astrological significance of the seasons.
Even though the spring equinox is erroneously considered the beginning of the signs, the signs have nothing to do with the constellations from which they took their names. The seasons, which are pinned to the equinoxes and solstices, take place within the framework of the constellations, and the seasons precess backwards through the constellations. Ancient observances such as Beltane(once May Eve), Lammas(once August Eve), Samhain(once November's Eve), and Candlemas(once February Eve) were the Cross-Quarter Days.
In summary, all life on Earth exists within and because of 3 main interlocking cycles: the day, the month, and the year. These are represented respectively by the angles; the Moon-Sun phase relationship; and the Earth's yearly orbit around the Sun with the 4 seasons' Turning Points (Equinoxes and Solstices) and the 4 Cross-Quarter Days. Garth Allen's work with the Apex of the Sun's Way (Capricorn Ingress) may well represent that point of connection between our Solar System and the Galaxy. The above lists are derived from these three cycles which occur within our solar system, which in turn exists within the neighbourhood of other stars and constellations, the framework for understanding our relationship to the universe and ourselves.
PS The Solar and Lunar Returns in either zodiac are returns to the same degree position of Sun and Moon as occurred at birth. The Sidereal Solar and Lunar returns do not as such represent a complete cycle of year and month as defined respectively by the seasons and by the Synodic Moon phase. [See Kay Cavender's Synodic Cycle (Return) for a monthly "cycle" chart in the star constellations; I do claim the angles and Moon aspects in such are extremely significant.] Ironically, in terms of the angles, the tropical solar return "does" unwittingly preserve an individual's birthday relationship to the yearly season/cycle points, which precess backward in relation to the constellations. And a further irony, the tropical solar return is an unwitting misunderstanding and misapplication of Fagan's revival of the sidereal concept of Solar and Lunar Returns -which (sidereal) Solars unfortunately only work for about 1-4 days (the orb/time of the transiting Sun on the natal lights) and the Lunars - a few hours. To summarise, Yes! I do think one must take moving Synetic Vernal Point into consideration for a yearly cycle chart, but by keeping the relation between SVP and birth- Sun position constant and by calculating in the star constellation zodiac, but I do not claim at this time that it works as a cycle chart, only that it should. (See Cavender's SVP./Seasonal Return.)
Note: According to historian and language expert Rupert Gleadow [Foreword 10th Aug 1959, Astrology Moray Series, No.2, "Wars In the Sidereal," by Brigadier R.C. Firebrace], originally and anciently, the occurrence of the equinoxes and solstices in whatever constellations constituted the constellations' cardinality!!! Gleadow says, "It is more than doubtful whether we should speak of 'cardinal constellations.' The cardinal signs were originally so called in the Latin translation of Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, but only because they were measured from the four turning-points of the zodiac, the solstices and equinoxes. The cardinal constellations, if there are any, should therefore now be Gemini, Virgo, Sagittarius and Pisces, and should remain so until the equinox enters Aquarius." To summarise, since the spring equinox now occurs about 5 degrees 19 minutes of Pisces, that means that now the Cardinal constellations are 5 degrees 19 minutes VIR-PIS, GEM-SAG -- thus eroding the basis of Fagan's "hub, spokes and rim" interpretation, which are but a rewarmed version of fixed, cardinal and mutable designations respectively.
A final and most basic philosophic point, one cannot emphasise enough that no archetype is good or bad in itself. Venus can do you in with arsenic in your best chocolates sweetly, and you are just as dead as if Mars and Saturn chops you up into little pieces with a hatchet. Any horoscope is comprised of the elements of time and space. One cannot tell if that horoscope is for a barn raising, or any other event, an animal's birth or a human's. Given that it is for a human, neither can one tell if that person is male or female, genius or idiot, saint or sinner. The intent is in the person; the horoscope shows only those talents that a person will use for accomplishing his or her purposes.
But given that you know it is for a man or woman in a particular century, in a particular culture, there are universal (general) qualities which can be known. And in this study of universals as expressed through character is the great joy of expanding one's understanding beyond the everyday personal limits. For instance, the tendency of Uranus to be evident in engineering charts would not be as common for women (if in the US.) because of cultural restraints on women's' occupations. Nor for most folk in other cultures. One has to go to character to see the quality of mind that is inventive and unique. Perhaps in the existing hunter-gatherer cultures, a medicine-person with Uranus strongly emphasised may discover new herbs or new ways of using herbs. Though understanding more of one's and/or another's character is greatly interesting and rewarding, the accompanying concept of the universality of such qualities gifts one with the sense of the continuity and universality of consciousness itself.
As a corollary to the above premise/s, let me address the bugaboo of "prediction," which for many people and astrologers defines whether an astrologer or astrology is valid. All too many astrologers fall into the ego-trap of pinning their ability as an astrologer on trying to "predict" events for folk. I simply find that many astrologers are psychic and, however impeded or aided by symbols systems, can often sense situations for other folk. When they are "wrong," does that disprove them as an astrologer? Yes, if that's the limits of what they think astrology is. But this view does not allow for choice and our ability to change events in our lives which we do daily, particularly if we heed forewarnings of any kind. So one best virtue of a dire prediction may be in the impetus to change the predicted outcome, thus seemingly invalidating the prediction. An astrologer who claims great percentages in accurate predictions is a laughable liar who discredits the study of astrology; he's not dealing with astrological archetypes to begin with. A psychic reader, perhaps another matter.
In accord with my understanding of the general nature of the archetypes and my preferred focus to understand the inner nature of a person and/or event, it seems stupid to try to name the event as if that were already written. Events to a large extent depend on an individual's choice and/or reactions which can and does cause, change, prevent and/or affirm events. Such expectation pressures an astrologer to be all-knowing and totally disregards commonplace observation of people's ability to change their lives.
So following my philosophy, should this section be bare? What can be known about future events? If a Mars Transit occurs (to one's lights and/or natal or locational angles), is this a terrible indication of aggressive energy resulting in anger or accidents? For an athlete, it might be devoutly hoped and prayed for, and at the Olympics may result in crowning glory. It is in an individual's use of Mars energy which indicates whether he be trophy winner or trophy, hero or bully. Whereas a Venus Transit, thought to be "benefic," may only result in a nice time at the Olympics. Generally one can find if there will be, figuratively speaking, cloudy, or stormy energy, or sunshine to come. Given that, one can plan a picnic or sandbag one's psyche. But to say a literal picnic is forthcoming is to misinterpret; better to say that "the genial Venusian feeling which finds expression in picnics (or other parties and social connections) may be forthcoming."
What can be (miraculously revealed) calculated in time and space is the kind of energy available to an individual at a particular time and space. To know this is to enter into a positive and conscious personal witness and living of archetypal energy. But this understanding, wonderful as it is, requires that an astrologer direct a "client" in the study of energies rather than telling him or her what will happen or what he should do. Not many pay for a tutor, they want a reading. Re-education is necessary in all facets of life. This is an unpopular view, of course, but a necessary one if astrology is to be understood at all. We should cultivate at least the minimum respect which does not demand that the Mystery of the universe conform to our understanding of it. This is Celestial, Stardust Stuff that we are all made of-- after all.
Copyright © 1995 Kay Cavender. All
rights reserved.